Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Breakdown of the Halakhic System - Two Earth-Shattering Shiurim - Exclusive
Lubab:
Okay. There is so much to address since I came back and it is really too much to do in one post.
In these discussions I like to try to keep things simple and stick to the point.
I hope you will read all of this with an open mind.
What we have here is a fundamental disagreement about the nature of machloket.
I'd like to summarize my view on the matter.
I am a Lubavitcher Chassid. I have a tradition from my Rebbe (a Gaon Olam by all legitimate accounts) handed down and recorded in his sefer "Hayom Yom" that every written statement of Chazal from Moshe Rabbeinu all the way through and including the Shach and Taz are written with Ruach Hakodesh. This wasn't the Rebbe's original statement. It was a tradition passed down from his Rebbe passed down originally from the Alter Rebbe, author of Shulchan Aruch HaRav. So this statement comes originally from a great codifier of the entire sea of halacha in a work that I'm sure is respected by your Rabbi and every other legitimate Rabbi you can find today. I don't think anyone would really have the gaul to argue today that they know more about halacha and the nature of machlokes than the Alter Rebbe.
I would be amused to see someone make such a claim but I doubt you'd have the guts. It would be the ultimate display of arrogance and ignorance all wrapped into one.
So we really have a statement from the Alter Rebbe that in each and every statement between these sages, while they may hold different veiwpoints, both are really written with Ruach Hakoshesh. Both are really true.
I've tried my best to explain how this can be so.
It's not postmodernism. Rather the school of hasidic philosophy shows how this is possible. The school of hasidic philosophy can show how two seemingly irreconcilable views or things can be viewed from a third higher or deeper perspective and once we grasp that perspective (the OBJECTIVE TRUTH-that's why this is not post-modernism) you can see how both those views which you once thought contradict really are just different expressions of the same inner truth much in the way that kindness and severity are both tools to do the right thing.
So I'm not really arguing with you guys at all.
We have basically three groups of people here.
1. Those whom R' Bar Chayim is attacking who seem to learn with faith that both sides are really right and lose the fundamental belief that there is an objective truth in this world. But they can't really explain to you how both sides are true, they just believe it blindly.
2. You guys. You guys know there is an objective truth. But when faced with a view that appears to your logic to contradict it you reject it to preserve what you believe is the objective truth.
3. The School of the Thought of Chabad Chassidus. This is a third view that included the two above and it involves a three step process.
It first recognizes fully how the two view appear irreconcilble, then it seeks to find the inner truth that underlies both views. And then finally seeks to show how both those opinions which appeared irreconcilable are really just two ways of explaining that inner truth.
Now I said before this can be done retroactively. Even if at the times of the gemarah or even the Rambam they had not seen how their views really unite, we can see how they do with the revelation of hasidic philosophy that was revealed by the Baal Shem Tov.
Most people (if they are lucky) operate in their learning on one or all of the four levels of Pshat Remez Drush or Sod.
If we just learn this way, all the four views do not seem to unite.
Hasidic philosophy seeks the inner truth behind all four of those levels then comes back to explain how all those four levels unite and are really saying the same thing in different words.
I can show you many examples of how this works for anyone who is intersted.
But the proof is really in the pudding.
If the tradition of my Rebbeim about the truth of all those opinions is correct, I, or at least me with the aid of my teacher who is more expert than I in hasidic philosophy should be able to prove to you how any of these opinions do not really contradict upon further reflection.
So let's try this out.
Give me an opinion or a machloket or a certain view of a sage from the Shach and Taz or before that you think is truly irreconcilable.
Give me one opinion that you think must be rejected as invalid and I will with G-d's help try to show you how it really is valid. Logically.
q_q already gave me one about Hagar and Keturah. I hope to get back to him soon once I've spoken with my Rabbi about it.
Lubab:
--- Quote from: judeanoncapta on June 29, 2008, 04:27:06 PM ---Allow me to quote my source from the Rambam.
http://mechon-mamre.org/p/p0000.htm
Paragraph number 33.
33 So a town's residents are not forced to observe the customs of another town, nor is one court told to enact the restrictive legislations of another court in its town. So too, if one of the Geonim understood that the correct way of the Law was such and such, and it became clear to another court afterwards that this was not the correct way of the Law written in the Talmud, the earlier court is not to be obeyed, but rather what seems more correct, whether earlier or later.
Now, it is incumbent upon Lubab to quote the Rambam that he claims backs him up.
But as far as my quote, one can clearly see that the Rambam does not beleive in the Post Modern view of the Torah and Talmudh that Lubab embraces.
--- End quote ---
I believe the Rambam there is giving a directive for what people should do in the future which would include Rabbis after the Shach and Taz who I agree can be wrong as you will read in my above post. I'm staking my claim only over the views of the Shach and Taz and back.
Lubab:
And while I think the Rambam would be fully supportive of this way of learning this way of learning was really only really brought out and revealed with the advent of the Baal Shem Tov and hasidic philosophy so I wouldn't expect to find it spoken about openly by the Rambam although I have no doubt I could find some hints to it.
We should also point out that machloket is not the same thing as setirah. Machloket means a division from the word Chiluk. It does not by it's translation mean the opinion is "wrong". These words "wrong" or "incorrect" are unfortunate mistranslations of the word Machloket.
It means this guy took this path and that guy took that path. But I'm sure we all agree that two paths can lead to the same goal as long as it's the right path.
Kahane-Was-Right BT:
--- Quote from: q_q_ on June 29, 2008, 04:03:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Kahane-Was-Right BT on June 29, 2008, 03:41:38 PM ---
--- Quote from: Lubab on June 29, 2008, 03:09:20 AM ---
I think the Rambam is on my side and I can prove it. What I'm saying is the exact same thing he says about the 3 groups who learn Torah. The third group which is correct contains and unites the views of the other two. That's the way it works.
--- End quote ---
I don't believe this section of Rambam you refer to has any application to your point or the discussion at hand. If you are using it here, you have changed the meaning of the 3 types of groups he describes!<snip>
--- End quote ---
this is becoming a bit of a circus.
I have no doubt that lulab will not be able to quote the RAMBAM and show that every opinion is true. Or whatever he is trying to claim.
(though i'm sure he can quote the RAMBA)
But since a few people -here, are familiar with the RAMBAM to which lulab is referring,
is anybody here - lulab or anybody - able to quote the text ? or at least a reference. And then argue that blah is what it concludes.And not what lulab says.
I have hilchot yesodei hatorah here in english, so if it is from there then I could look it up and type it in.
--- End quote ---
I think that the three types of students were from Rambam on intro to perek chelek, but I don't have it with me.
Lubab:
I'd appreciate it if people don't go further with this until reading my post carefully at the top of the thread because I don't want to go in circles all day.
I've read you posts with care and I hope you will give me the same respect.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version